Guest guest Posted August 15, 2000 Report Share Posted August 15, 2000 > I'm not sure that this is the answer to the >dilemma however. Since the real truth cannot be spoken, everything that is >spoken of by sage or scripture is ultimately untrue, whether it's referring >to relative or absolute. Fine, but then no one can claim any one to be the >true version, to which ultimate reference should be made. But this is >exactly what traditionalists do. I agree with you Frank, but do they? R. >Viswanathan makes exactly this point, wanting to regard the Upanishads and >Vedas as axioms that are unquestionable. Why should I do this when living >sages do not? Dennis Greetings. Your questions are well taken. As I had in my fist response you have already made conclusions and unless you 'unconclude' yourself, no one can answer you, since you have already answered yourself. But leaving that aside, here are some points if you still are open and want to dwell on it. First, we are not seeking answers that are in the realm that can be deduced by pratyaksha or anumaana - direct perception or logical deduction, we need to relay on some thing other than these too for the means of knowledge. This part I am sure you agree. For that Shabda is the only pramaaNa. Shabda include both shaastra, in this case Veda and also apta vaakya, words of wise, from your point say the living sages. Here Faith or Shradda is essential since we are dealing with entities beyond the grasp of intellect - Shankara said - shraddaa is 'shaastrasya guruvaakyasya satyabuddhavadhaaraNa' - Faith that the words of the teacher and the shaastra are true indeed'. This is actually a working hypothesis needed to proceed further in saadhana. - Hence shradda is part of saadhana chatushhTayam - the four fold qualifications needed. Therefore, as I said in my post - See why Vedanta? - if you have full faith in the teaching of the sage you believe in - then there is nothing to it and go ahead and follow - DO NOT QUESTION HIS WORDS EITHER -take his statements as though they are 'Veda vaakya-s'. Follow and you will reach the destination. And that exactly what Nisargadatta Maharaj did - if you follow his life. But As I recall, your mail started with the question - Why there is conflict between the words of the living sage and the scriptural statements. - Such a question does not and should not arise if one has full faith in the words of the sage one believes in. He is absolutely right and that is the end of it - But since such a question arose, at least to me, is an indication that there is a question of doubt since one finds a conflict between the sages words vs. the scriptures words. In the case of doubt - the answer then it is better to take Veda as correct than the words of a particular sage. This is not just the traditionalist view - this is just practical and is used in Sciences as well as a basis. If a scientist makes a statement contradictory to the published theories of the past, no one is just going to jump in until the new theory is proved beyond any reasonable doubt. Once it is proved it becomes part of the knowledge or Veda for others to study and proceed - This is the scientific approach to any problem. Vedas even if one does not want to accept that they are 'apourusheya' are only recordings of past scientists or sages who have confirmed the theories by their own experiences that it is indeed true. Hence they are the statements of sages only which have been time tested. Hence a doubt arose in your mind who is more correct, until one confirms by your own experiments who is right, the right way is to take the time tested teaching as more correct than the statements of a particular sage. Now concerning the axiomatic statements - Veda-s are not axiomatic statements or declarations, but statements which are based on experiences of sages who have followed the path and confirmed by their own experiences - shR^it, anubhava and yukti are combined here - In ChaDigya, Uddalaka takes his son Swetaketu step by step in establishing the truth - He give several thought experiments for Swetaketu to perform and guides him in each step to lead to 'tat tvam asi swetaketu'. Regarding reincarnation you asked - Krishna provides a definite answers in his discussions with Arjuna - coming from horses mouth as it were - particularly when Arjuna asks what happens to the yogi who dies without reaching his goal - See . Ch. 6. Hence it is not the orthodox or traditionalists versus non-traditionalists views - it is the question of what it the ultimate authority in resolving - when there are doubts or conflicts between ones understanding of what living sage sates versus what scriptures says. First to understand what scriptures says as Shree Jaishankara rightly pointed out that the teacher must have through grasp of the scriptural statements. Since it is not an objective science, the correct understanding of the scriptural is likely only when the teacher is taught by a proper teacher who himself has not only has the experience of the truth but through knowledge of the scriptures - Hence shruti's declaration that one should approach a teacher who is not only BrahmanishhTa but shrothria - one who is well versed in scriptures. - That is what 'sampradaaya' teacher means. Bottom line - If you donot have any doubts about the statements of the living sage that you have faith - there no question to ask - Just with that faith proceed and you will reach the goal he has pointed. If you do have doubt then only - scripture is a better source than any particular individual. What is required ultimately is faith to proceed further and that is the bottom line. This ends my discussion of why scripture is better pramaana - In my second posting on the Notes on Brahmasuutra I promised to address the 'anumaana Prakriya' - Role of logical inference and some aspects of this will be discussed there. Hari Om! Sadananda K. Sadananda Code 6323 Naval Research Laboratory Washington D.C. 20375 Voice (202)767-2117 Fax:(202)767-2623 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 15, 2000 Report Share Posted August 15, 2000 Namaste Sadananda-ji, You give a very good summary to Dennis's question about a sage vs. the scriptures: Bottom line - If you do not have any doubts about the statements of the living sage that you have faith - there no question to ask - Just with that faith proceed and you will reach the goal he has pointed. If you do have doubt then only - scripture is a better source than any particular individual. Perhaps Dennis has found that person. If not, I hope soon! Om! --Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 15, 2000 Report Share Posted August 15, 2000 > >Perhaps Dennis has found that person. If not, I hope soon! > > >Om! > >--Greg Greg Thanks for your comments. Every seeker will have the right type of teacher that he needs to proceed in his path. Even JK who is against a formal teacher has his lessons that he needed in one form or the other. That is the Law of Nature. For that one should be open minded to open his/her heart to the inner call and not shut the door and refuse to listen. But fortunatly, Lord has infinite patience, and He will be waiting just behind the door to make sure in case the felow opens, He can be available! Hari Om! Sadanadna K. Sadananda Code 6323 Naval Research Laboratory Washington D.C. 20375 Voice (202)767-2117 Fax:(202)767-2623 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.